Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

profitofdoom

The Facebook Two

Recommended Posts

It seems quite clear to me that this is an attempt to stifle free speech rather than anything to do with the riots.Dave and the rest of the occupants of Millionaire's Row are running scared that it may soon be them occupying the tumbrils that they would like to see Gaddafi in.

The question needs to be asked : Is there one law for the rich and another for the rest of us? There can of course only be one answer.Cops who quite clearly have taken the Murdoch filthy lucre have been instantly cleared.Did anyone else find Hayman's theatrical denial quite risible?

So come on then Dave and your legal lackeys.In the words of Delia "Let's be 'avin you" This post is equally inflammatory so arrest me and let's see what you are made of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the theatre IS on fire and it's the likes of Dave and his mates who struck the match.

You're conflating disparate issues. By all means be angry at, campaign against, criticise the dodgy bankers, bent politicians, crooked journos. None of that excuses anyone else's crime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong.

Completely.

And you know it (I suspect).

Question all you like, whether it's Politics, Religion or someone's choice of wife, but don't, ever, attempt to organise a riot where people, could potentially get killed, especially innocents who've nothing to do with your little crusade, OK?

Hey, when he said 'Free Speech comes with Responsibilities', he was actually agreeing with your point of view I believe...!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrong.

Completely.

And you know it (I suspect).

Question all you like, whether it's Politics, Religion or someone's choice of wife, but don't, ever, attempt to organise a riot where people, could potentially get killed, especially innocents who've nothing to do with your little crusade, OK?

They didn't tho.

One no one turned up to, the other was a pissed up bloke pulling a prank.

In any event total losses = zero, total harm = zero.

****** all happened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They didn't tho.

One no one turned up to, the other was a pissed up bloke pulling a prank.

In any event total losses = zero, total harm = zero.

****** all happened.

Did it divert police resources?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, one would hope, on such forums like this we can exchange ideas about anything and everything, but when it comes to attempting to organise a riot which, for all wants and purposes is potentially attempting to initiate the initial first stages of the break down of our collective society as those which frequent the far left would like to see, then there is a line which one shouldn't cross, is that crystal?

That line should be based on facts, not the lily livered projections of the overly anxious.

I don't see many nobel prizes being handed out for "potential chemistry" based on facebook postings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did it divert police resources?

(and yes I know you don't want the police to even exist :rolleyes: )

The police are responsible for their behaviour.

People in general are responsible for their own emotions.

When you have a situation where ****** all happens, it's a bit rich to say people were scared without also saying people were wrong. 4 years because a few people have anxiety issues base don absolutely bugger all? ****** me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The police are responsible for their behaviour.

People in general are responsible for their own emotions.

When you have a situation where ****** all happens, it's a bit rich to say people were scared without also saying people were wrong. 4 years because a few people have anxiety issues base don absolutely bugger all? ****** me.

Did it divert police resources? Yes or no.

And another thing. How would the police or anyone else reading it know that nothing would happen - did they have a time machine? geez, you are so thick it's incredible! :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the internet is that the written word doesnt convey the body language and body language accounts for the majority of the communication between humans. Its why you see the below image so often, I know I over analyse things, I've always done that its just the way I am hence my question. Of course emoticons help convey the message but lazyiness also means less communication takes place.

duty_calls.png

http://en.wikipedia....i/Body_language

Its why speech writers are important for politicians to ensure the correct words are chosen to convey the correct meaning especially when dealing with foreign countries who have different cultures ala the HSBC adverts

.

Was I right though? I think you both agreed with each other but he thought you didn't!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you should re read what he's said, he's implying I organised a riot, thats quite a hefty claim to make imo.

Yes I know. But what he doesn't know is that you were saying that it was wrong to organise a riot - i.e. those two were wrong. He thinks you're empathising with them, but you aren't!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1. These two shouted fire in the proverbial crowded theatre.

While they should have been punished, 4 years is more than merely excessive, it's ludicrous, especially as neither had a criminal record.

Husband gets four yours for baseball bat murder

Outrage as hit-and-run killer gets only four years in jail

Pub brawl killer gets four years

Call for law change after killer gets just four years

Street killer gets four years

My object all sublime

I shall achieve in time —

To let the punishment fit the crime —

The punishment fit the crime

The Mikado

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you there. However, I think these killers you've highlighted should have received more than 4 years...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I know. But what he doesn't know is that you were saying that it was wrong to organise a riot - i.e. those two were wrong. He thinks you're empathising with them, but you aren't!

They **didn't** organise a riot.

That's why 4 years is so bloody stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, one would hope, on such forums like this we can exchange ideas about anything and everything, but when it comes to attempting to organise a riot which, for all wants and purposes is potentially attempting to initiate the initial first stages of the break down of our collective society as those which frequent the far left would like to see, then there is a line which one shouldn't cross, is that crystal?

Agree, there is a line between freedom of speech and attempting to organise a criminal activity. They crossed it. The fact that they did it in the public domain by typing rather than talking just makes them stupid and lazy.

Having said that..

While they should have been punished, 4 years is more than merely excessive, it's ludicrous, especially as neither had a criminal record.

Agree with this as well. I actually know people who have served less for taking lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you there. However, I think these killers you've highlighted should have received more than 4 years...

+1 the problem is not the facebook sentences, it's the others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They **didn't** organise a riot.

That's why 4 years is so bloody stupid.

That's irrelevant - they incited a riot, and under the relevant act, incitement is treated in the same manner as the actual offense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's irrelevant - they incited a riot, and under the relevant act, incitement is treated in the same manner as the actual offense.

Then the act is ******ing retarded.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know what they'll actually serve? Courts are supposed to announce sentence without applying guilty plea discounts, so presumably less than four years as they pleaded (up to a third off for an early plea), and then half off the remainder under automatic release for sentences of four years or less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then the act is ******ing retarded.

perhaps, but it's as things are and that relates to whether or not these sentences are disproportionate to the crime given the law as it stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They **didn't** organise a riot.

That's why 4 years is so bloody stupid.

I didn't think incompetence is normally a legal defence. Looks to me like they *tried* to organise a riot - can't say i'll lose much sleep if they're locked up for it.

Or rather, define 'organise'. Is organising a party to ask people to come along, give a suggested venue and behaviour, or have you only organised a party once the people you've invited turn up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 337 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.